Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.
1. WILMER CUTLER PICKERING HALE AND DORR There’s a new champ atop Legal Times’ annual list of the D.C. area’s highest-grossing law offices. Powered by a merger and increased hiring, Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr dislodged Hogan & Hartson from the top slot, a post Hogan had occupied since 2002. The product of a June 2004 merger between Washington’s Wilmer, Cutler & Pickering and Boston-based Hale and Dorr, the new firm has more than 400 attorneys in the region. Hale and Dorr added its 70 Northern Virginia lawyers to Wilmer’s 340 in the District. In addition, the combined firm hired another 30 attorneys to boost its ranks. But Wilmer’s head count wasn’t the only thing that grew: Profits per equity partner at the combined firm jumped to $890,000 in 2004. By comparison, Hale and Dorr’s firmwide figure for 2003 was $810,000; Wilmer’s was $780,000. Despite the strong balance sheet, not all of the firm’s practice groups showed strong growth. Wilmer’s D.C. bankruptcy attorneys saw less work than in 2003, according to William Perlstein, co-chairman of the firm’s management committee. That slowdown was due in part to the dissolution of Ashburn, Va.-based PSINet, once one of the region’s largest Internet service providers, whose bankruptcy Wilmer lawyers had overseen. The firm’s telecommunications group also saw less work in early 2004, as litigation related to the Telecommunications Act of 1996 ended. That telecom litigation work was replaced later in the year by transactional work stemming from the SBC Communications Inc.-AT&T Corp. and Verizon Communications Inc.-MCI Inc. mergers, Perlstein says. But many of the firm’s lawyers thrived in 2004. Wilmer’s securities enforcement group, headed by William McLucas, represented Fannie Mae in investigations by two federal regulators in connection with allegations that the mortgage-backer misstated its earnings to investors and engaged in accounting irregularities. Wilmer’s mutual fund practice represented the Janus Capital Group, Citigroup Inc., and others in state and federal investigations related to accusations of improper stock transactions. The aerospace giant Boeing Corp. remained a key firm client in 2004. Bill Clinton-era Deputy Attorney General Jamie Gorelick, in conjunction with McGuireWoods partner Richard Cullen, represented the company in negotiations with the government stemming from Boeing’s involvement in recent Air Force contracting scandals. Former U.S. Trade Representative Charlene Barshefsky and partner Robert Novick also counseled the aircraft-maker in its long-simmering trade dispute with Europe’s Airbus S.A.S. The firm’s growth in Washington came despite the distractions inevitable in the merger of two $300 million firms. “We spent a lot time integrating various practice groups and working on plans,” says Perlstein. “We were pleased with the year.” � Jason McLure 2. HOGAN & HARTSON In the depths of the economic slowdown in 2002, many Hogan & Hartson partners and associates failed to hit their billable-hour targets. But rather than lay off associates or squeeze out partners, the firm stuck it out � albeit at a cost to the bottom line. But that decision may be looking sage now that the firm has posted healthy growth for the second consecutive year. “Not laying off turned out to be smart,” says J. Warren Gorrell, the firm’s chairman, “because now the lawyers who had extra time two years ago were busy and they had trained folks on hand.” Though Hogan dropped from the top spot in the D.C. 20, a place it had held since 2002, its local revenue grew 10 percent and D.C.-area profits per partner soared to $905,000 from $740,000. Hogan’s corporate practice, which accounts for about 40 percent of firm revenue, helped lead the firm’s growth. Hogan’s attorneys acted as tax counsel to the News Corp. in its $6.6 billion purchase of the General Motors Corp.’s stake in the Hughes Electronics Corp. Hogan also represented the News Corp. in its domestication from Australia to the United States and in a $912 million equity offering. Also helping matters: The firm raised its rates nearly 6 percent in 2004. Hogan lobbyists also drove the firm’s revenue growth, despite the slowdown in congressional activity caused by the presidential election. Hogan’s lobbying revenue jumped 16 percent to $51.6 million last year, according to data published by Influence, a sister publication of Legal Times. That growth helped Hogan hang on to the No. 3 spot on the Influence 50 survey of D.C.’s largest lobbying practices. On the litigation side, the firm helped the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center win a jury verdict in a wrongful-death suit stemming from a dispute over whether patients involved in clinical trials had given “informed consent” to participate in research. Despite the rapid rate of growth, the firm lost its Paris office to DLA Piper Rudnick Gray Cary. And the number of Hogan lawyers in the D.C. area fell 1 percent to 451, making it three consecutive years the firm has trimmed its head count. That’s a trend Gorrell says he expects the firm to reverse. In 2005, he expects the firm’s D.C. and Northern Virginia offices to add as many as two dozen lawyers. That’s growth the firm may need if it wants to recapture its spot as the District’s revenue giant. � Jason McLure 3. ARNOLD & PORTER Arnold & Porter may be one of the biggest law firms in town, but its prominence did little to boost the firm’s revenues in 2004. Though firmwide revenue nudged up 2.3 percent, D.C. revenue dipped slightly � by a half-percent � to $297.2 million in 2004. The culprit, firm partners say, was an attrition-based slide in head count. Fewer lawyers were on hand to help drive up overall D.C. grosses. In the District alone, Arnold & Porter saw its head count drop from 432 to 418. James Sandman, Arnold & Porter’s managing partner, says he’s not too concerned about the drop because the firm hired large numbers of associates during the economic downturn and has seen very low attrition until now. “We thought we could do the work of the firm with the same or fewer lawyers,” Sandman says. While Arnold & Porter’s profits per partner jumped slightly to $830,000, some of the firm’s top rainmakers saw an even higher increase as a result of a shift in the firm’s compensation system. In an effort to retain its highest-billing partners, Arnold & Porter raised the spread between the highest- and lowest-paid partner last year, boosting the pay a partner could earn by more than $200,000. And firm leaders began tightening the reins on the partnership, moving more associates into counsel positions. Still, Sandman says, 2004 was a good year. The firm kept a tight line on expense growth and saw steady business in litigation, he notes. Among its largest matters: representing Wyeth on fen-phen class actions and Philip Morris USA Inc. in ongoing litigation. Arnold & Porter was also lead counsel to the US Airways Group Inc. in its Chapter 11 proceedings, which from September to December alone brought in about $1.2 million a month, according to partners. Arnold & Porter attorneys also handled significant patent litigation for the Microsoft Corp. and oversaw the CSX Corp.’s sale of its port facilities, CSX World Terminals, to Dubai Ports International for $1.15 billion. Whatever the challenges of last year, Sandman says 2005 is likely to be a better one with an uptick in corporate work and big-name hires such as former Rep. Jim Turner (D-Texas) and a six-attorney securities enforcement team from Fulbright & Jaworski, headed by rainmaker Michael Trager. � Emma Schwartz 4. SKADDEN, ARPS, SLATE, MEAGHER & FLOM New York-based Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom has long made its mark on the D.C. market as the highest-grossing out-of-town firm. 2004 was no exception. After limited growth in 2003, Skadden, with gross revenues of $224.4 million, moved to No. 4 in this year’s D.C. rankings, outpacing the home-grown Covington & Burling. An increased workload, coupled with a rise in rates, was evident in the firm’s revenue-per-lawyer figure, which jumped 10 percent to $970,000. And profits per partner were the highest among the D.C. 20, reaching $1.7 million. Litigation has always been one of Skadden’s major moneymakers, but Michael Rogan, managing partner of the firm’s 231-attorney D.C. office, says the practice area in 2004 grew twice as fast as the rest of the office’s specialties. Much of the litigation work stemmed from the continued fallout from the corporate scandals and subsequent corporate governance regulations, Rogan says. The payoff for Skadden: a rise in the number of corporate audits and investigations and Securities and Exchange Commission enforcement defense work. Skadden’s D.C. office went to bat for several embattled companies. Among the top representations: Fannie Mae, in connection with the Department of Justice’s inquiry into the mortgage lender’s accounting practices; the HealthSouth Corp., following a probe into a $2.5 billion accounting misstatement; the French BNP Paribas Bank, which has come under scrutiny in the investigations of the United Nation’s oil-for-food program in Iraq; and the Allbritton family, which controlled Riggs Bank, the bank that recently pleaded guilty to failing to report suspicious transactions involving foreign clients. Tax controversy work also picked up, Rogan says, and the office brought in Pamela Olson, former deputy assistant secretary for tax policy in the Department of the Treasury, as a partner. Energy regulatory work was a major source of revenue, Rogan says. And deal-brokering work continued to reap profits. One of Skadden’s major deals in Washington was Shell Generating and Bechtel Enterprises Energy’s $1.75 billion sale of InterGen North American to a private equity partnership. The firm also handled its share of antitrust matters, representing KLM Royal Dutch Airlines in its $1 billion acquisition by Air France and the $12 billion merger of the nuclear power company Exelon Co. with the Public Service Enterprise Group. � Emma Schwartz 5. COVINGTON & BURLING Even while Skadden, Arps and Wilmer Cutler soared past the firm in revenues, you won’t see many tears at Covington & Burling. The firm saw revenue growth of 8 percent in the D.C. area, and profits per partner edged up to $825,000 from $780,000. Partner Mitchell Dolin says work was up across the board and that no single case or practice area drove the increases. “The general feeling is that the real difference is that people can’t remember a time when there were more major matters for more major clients,” Dolin says. Despite the increased workload, Covington kept a lid on head count. In the District, the number of attorneys actually declined slightly from 311 to 304. That drop, coupled with higher grosses, helped boost revenue per lawyer by 8 percent. Covington did have one major departure in 2004: Bobby Burchfield, a litigation rainmaker who is representing House Majority Leader Tom DeLay (R-Texas) in his ethics controversies, exited for McDermott, Will & Emery. It’s a rare departure from Covington, which is known for its tightknit partnership. The firm’s most significant business came from its antitrust and securities practices, Dolin says. One of the firm’s major clients has been mortgage lender Freddie Mac, which the firm has represented in securities and antitrust litigation, as well as in a Securities and Exchange Commission investigation. Freddie Mac has been under intense scrutiny from federal officials since disclosing accounting misstatements in 2003. Corporate work saw an uptick as well, Dolin says. One of the firm’s largest matters: handling longtime client Kerr-McGee Corp.’s $4.5 billion acquisition of the Westport Resources Corp. The regulatory front was busy as well. A team of lawyers from Covington helped the IBM Corp. secure key government approval for its $1.75 billion sale of Lenova to China. And the recent U.S. Food and Drug Administration scrutiny of a class of anti-inflammatory drugs known as Cox-2 inhibitors proved a boon for Covington’s FDA practice: The firm was tapped by the Pfizer Corp. to handle the pharmaceutical giant’s ongoing regulatory troubles involving Bextra and Celebrex. � Emma Schwartz 6. AKIN GUMP STRAUSS HAUER & FELD Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld’s D.C. office managed robust revenue growth in 2004. But that growth � 13 percent over 2003 � didn’t translate into substantially higher profits per partner. Average partner profits increased just 1 percent, to $940,000. The firm’s chairman, R. Bruce McLean, says the departure of 13 attorneys from its health care group last May for Gardner Carton & Douglas slowed the firm’s growth. The group, headed by Philip Green, included six D.C. partners and two associates. “That was a good group,” McLean says. “We miss them.” In an effort to rebuild its health care practice, the firm brought in former Secretary of Health and Human Services Tommy Thompson in March 2005. Thompson, elected Wisconsin governor four times, splits his time between the firm and Deloitte & Touche USA. Akin Gump’s 30-person government relations practice, one of the largest in Washington, also showed modest growth in 2004. The firm posted an 8 percent increase in lobbying revenue, pulling in $64.2 million in 2004, according to Legal Times‘ sister publication Influence. McLean says growth from lobbying would have been even stronger had the tight 2004 presidential race not sapped legislative activity on Capitol Hill. “Things got quiet in the fourth quarter of 2004,” McLean says. “Every politician in America was focused on the presidential and congressional elections.” Two major deals helped drive the firm’s corporate practice, which had lagged in recent years. Lawyers in Washington, New York, Texas, and Europe collaborated to advise Russian oil giant OAO Lukoil in its $2 billion alliance with ConocoPhillips. D.C. partner Melissa Schwartz also enjoyed the fruits of the firm’s Russia connection. Schwartz acted as lead counsel on debt offerings worth $750 million for Vimpel-Communications, Russia’s second-largest mobile phone company. As for litigation, the firm represented a committee of Worldcom Inc. creditors after the company’s bankruptcy. The firm also bulked up its IP litigation team with the addition of former Pillsbury Winthrop partner Arthur Wineburg in Washington and former Shaw Pittman partner Yitai Hu in San Francisco. � Jason McLure 7. FINNEGAN, HENDERSON, FARABOW, GARRETT & DUNNER Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner saw revenue dip by 3 percent in 2003 as it coped with the continuing aftermath of the dot-com crash. But the IP boutique is sailing back. Last year, grosses shot up 17 percent to $185 million. Profits per partner also climbed 17 percent, and revenue per lawyer was up by 5 percent. Christopher Foley, Finnegan’s managing partner, says the firm drew on an uptick in the electrical and computer industries. The industries boosted research and development spending � and that translated into more patent prosecutions for Finnegan. “We had a very-high-billing year,” Foley says. The firm’s major clients � GlaxoSmithKline, Eli Lilly and Co., and L’Oreal � helped keep the dollars rolling in. And Finnegan added Aventis to its list of major clients, taking on the company’s ongoing litigation over the drug Lovenox. Patent litigation, which makes up 20 percent of the firm’s revenues, grew across the board, particularly with clients Caterpillar Inc. and software company SAP. With the expansion of the firm’s Taiwan office, which opened in 2003, Finnegan brought in new litigation from clients such as the Chi Mei Optoelectronics Corp. and the System General Corp. Biomedical device manufacturers also represented an important source of revenues, particularly the Guidant Corp. The firm spent much of the year preparing for what was a successful January 2005 trial over allegations of patent infringement against the company by medical device competitor Medtronic Inc. The revenue increases were helped by one-time events, including fees from several contingency cases and a move to less-costly D.C. office space on New York Avenue, N.W. As for the year ahead, Foley says the firm has no specific expansion plans. Despite struggles at other IP boutiques, Foley says of Finnegan, “I think we’ll grow.” � Emma Schwartz 8. STEPTOE & JOHNSON Steptoe & Johnson catapulted from No. 16 to No. 8 among D.C.’s 20 highest-grossing firms in 2004, powered by an 18 percent jump in gross revenue for the D.C. office. With just a minimal increase in head count, the firm saw numbers soar: Revenues hit $182.5 million, profits per partner were up about $75,000 to $825,000, and revenue per lawyer climbed 12 percent to $740,000. “It has been a good year across the board,” says Roger Warin, Steptoe’s managing partner. Warin says litigation, especially in the areas of toxic torts, white-collar defense, and international trade, was responsible for much of the growth. Intellectual property and insurance practices also did extremely well, he says. The firm was at the center of some of the highest-profile white collar defenses of 2004, thanks largely to partner Reid Weingarten’s representation of Mark Belnick, Tyco International Ltd.’s former general counsel, and Bernard Ebbers, the former CEO of WorldCom Inc. Among other big-ticket cases, partners Steven Davidson and Howard Stahl represented Motorola Inc. in a long-running fraud case against Turkish telecommunications company Telsim. The case eventually led to a $2.13 billion judgment for compensatory damages in favor of Steptoe’s client against the Telsim’s owners. Another $2.13 billion judgment is pending. In addition, D.C. partners Doug Green and Stephen Fennell represented DuPont in a class action concerning water contamination at the company’s Teflon-producing plant in West Virginia. There were “substantial fees incurred” in that litigation, Warin says. Other major clients include the Canadian timber industry, which is fighting the U.S. government over lumber import tariffs; CACI International Inc., the private contractor involved in the Abu Ghraib prison scandal; and Riggs Bank on congressional oversight of its acquisition by the PNC Financial Services Group Inc. The firm also became the national coordinating counsel for the Metropolitan Life Insurance Co., handling the company’s asbestos litigation. The only dark cloud was in the transactional tax practice. “It was not a bad year,” he says. “[The growth] just was not as dramatic as the others.” Warin says he expects Steptoe’s growth to continue. The firm opened an office in New York in January of 2005 and has continued to bring in laterals in both the intellectual property and insurance areas, including Jim Rocap, who joined the insurance practice from Baker Botts in early 2004. � Bethany Broida 9. WILLIAMS & CONNOLLY Litigation specialist Williams & Connolly’s 2004 client list read like a who’s who of scandal. From the allegations of torture at Abu Ghraib to Jack Abramoff’s lobbying to questions over the size of pay packages for industry captains like Richard Grasso and Franklin Raines, Williams & Connolly partners increased profits again in 2004 � often by defending rich and powerful figures accused of wrongdoing. The firm’s profits per partner averaged $870,000 in 2004 on revenue of $178.3 million. Partner F. Whitten Peters represented two government contractors at the center of the Abu Ghraib scandal, the Titan Corp. and CACI International Inc. The contractors were sued in federal court in San Diego by the Center for Constitutional Rights on behalf of victims of abuse at the U.S. prison in Iraq. Greenberg Traurig also turned to Williams & Connolly after its former star lobbyist, Jack Abramoff, was accused of a number of high-profile ethical lapses. Partners Gregory Craig and Kevin Downey were retained to represent Greenberg in connection with civil litigation as well as congressional and criminal investigations stemming from Abramoff’s activity. (Abramoff himself is represented by Chadbourne & Parke’s Abbe Lowell.) Greenberg isn’t the only law firm accused of wrongdoing that Williams & Connolly has represented. Partner John Villa represented Houston-based Vinson & Elkins, whose attorneys counseled the Enron Corp. before its collapse. Additionally, the firm was named co-national coordinating and trial counsel for Merck & Co. in defending the pharmaceutical giant from a swarm of lawsuits related to safety concerns over pain reliever Vioxx. Partner Brendan Sullivan also represented former New York Stock Exchange Chairman Grasso in a lawsuit brought by New York Attorney General Eliot Spitzer related to Grasso’s $187.5 million pay package. Raines turned to partners Downey and Robert Barnett for legal counsel. The former Fannie Mae CEO was forced to step down in December after the Securities and Exchange Commission and the mortgage guarantor’s regulator, the Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight, accused the company of filing false earnings reports and manipulating its accounting. The firm also represents Comcast SportsNet in its lawsuit against Major League Baseball, the Baltimore Orioles, and the Mid-Atlantic Sports Network over television rights to the Washington Nationals baseball team. That suit could indirectly benefit both Raines and Williams & Connolly partner Paul Wolff (who is not involved in the case), both of whom are members of a local group bidding for the Nationals. � Jason McLure 10. MCDERMOTT, WILL & EMERY McDermott, Will & Emery continued its march up the D.C. 20 chart, bounding into the Top 10 with a revenue increase of 7 percent and a $100,000 increase in revenue per lawyer. The Chicago-based firm, which has a 204-lawyer D.C. outpost, reported 2004 D.C.-area revenue of $176.8 million and revenue per lawyer of $890,000. Profits per partner remained relatively flat, but equity partners at the firm have little reason to complain about their compensation � they’re pulling in an average of $1.195 million. Intellectual property and trial practices were the keys to McDermott’s gains, says Timothy Waters, co-partner in charge of the D.C. office. “As we came out of 2003, things got busy in the IP litigation area,” he says. “Companies involved in IP and major litigations are tending to try cases more often, so we made that area a major focus and are building that area up.” Two of the larger cases McDermott was involved in last year were patent infringement cases. One was a successful appeal on behalf of Mars Inc. in a suit against H.J. Heinz Co. concerning a patent for a pet-food product. The second was partial summary judgment against the Microsoft Corp. on behalf of Research Corporation Technologies Inc. That case, heard in the U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona, found that many of Microsoft’s products � including Windows 2000, Windows XP, Office 2000, and Office XP � infringe on RCT’s patents. Corporate work also picked up in 2004, says Waters, with antitrust work and mergers and acquisitions serving as mainstays of the firm. The number of mergers and acquisitions crashed in 2000, he says, but they have been picking up: “2004 was better than 2003, and 2005 is looking even better than 2004.” In late 2004, the firm represented DaVita Inc. in its acquisition of the U.S. renal care business of Gambro Healthcare Inc., a $3 billion transaction. The firm is also representing the Lockheed Martin Corp. in antitrust litigation against the Boeing Corp. McDermott also scored a major rainmaker in 2004, when Bobby Burchfield, a litigator who heads the complex litigation practice, jumped from Covington & Burling. Burchfield is now co-partner in charge of the D.C. office. � Bethany Broida 11. LATHAM & WATKINS Three factors helped drive D.C.-area revenue and profits to record levels at Latham & Watkins, according to Eric Bernthal, the firm’s D.C. managing partner. “We worked harder, our rates were up slightly, and we were slightly better leveraged,” he says. Helping drive the firm’s growth was antitrust work representing the Oracle Corp. in its mudslinging match with the Justice Department over the California company’s acquisition of PeopleSoft Inc. Fifty Latham attorneys worked the case, including 10 from its D.C. office. The firm’s transactional and regulatory attorneys represented paging company Arch Wireless Inc. in its $281 million merger with Metrocall Wireless Inc. And Latham’s regulatory lawyers also counseled Hughes Electronics’ DirecTV in antitrust and regulatory matters before the News Corp.’s purchase of a $6.6 billion stake in Hughes. Tobacco money helped Latham as well. D.C. litigation partner Beth Wilkinson led a Latham team that helped cigarette giant Philip Morris USA win a major product liability suit in California in a case decided earlier this year. Despite the growth, the firm wasn’t able to hang on to all of its partners. Last spring, the firm lost its pro bono chairman, Steven Schulman, who jumped to plaintiffs firm Cohen, Milstein, Hausfeld & Toll. But it also made gains on the lateral market, picking up partners Brian Smith and Timothy Keehan from Mayer, Brown, Rowe & Maw. Latham’s D.C.-area profits per partner hit $1.4 million in 2004, a 10 percent jump and the second-highest take among D.C. 20 firms. “The regulatory market has been incredibly robust,” Bernthal says, “considering a fully Republican-controlled Congress and administration.” � Jason McLure 12. SHAW PITTMAN In its last full year as a stand-alone firm, Shaw Pittman continued to feel the effects of the technology bust. Revenues remained relatively flat for the fourth year � up just 3 percent to $171.5 million. And as it prepped for a merger, head count dipped slightly, and the firm de-equitized more than half of its partners. That helped profits per equity partner climb 40 percent to $770,000, but the average compensation for all partners at the firm � equity and nonequity � slid from $545,000 to $535,000. The math, however, worked. In April 2005, San Francisco-based Pillsbury Winthrop merged with the firm to create Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman. D.C.-based firmwide vice chairman Stephen Huttler says pre-merger Shaw Pittman had many successes. Though its overall numbers were stagnant, the firm exceeded its profitability targets by 5 percent. The wave of outsourcing proved a boon for the firm’s top-billing global sourcing practice, which represented about 20 percent of the firm’s revenues, Huttler says. One of Shaw Pittman’s largest transactions was arranging the outsourcing for the call centers, data processing, programming, and back-office accounting of the Dun & Bradstreet Co., a business information service provider. Corporate and securities work was the second-largest moneymaker, Huttler says. The firm represented the Australia-based Macquarie Bank in its more than $200 million acquisition of Atlantic Aviation Services Inc. Government contracts work was also a “red hot” area, Huttler says. With the rise in homeland security contracts and a rapidly consolidating government contracting industry in the Washington region, Shaw Pittman handled a slew of transactions, such as the sale of Computer & Hi-tech Management Inc. to FC Business Systems Inc. Shaw Pittman’s real estate practice continued to carve out business opportunities in the privatization of military housing, Huttler says. And the firm’s real estate investment trust practice was strong, with a client list including the Crescent Real Estate Equities Co. and CNL Restaurant Properties Inc. � Emma Schwartz 13. HOWREY After a million-dollar year in 2003, Howrey fell back to earth last year. Revenues dropped sharply � 13 percent � and the firm slipped from the Top 10 among D.C.’s highest-grossing firms. Howrey’s boost in ’03 came primarily from a $65 million windfall in a class action against a handful of major tobacco companies. That pushed profits per partner to $1.09 million. In 2004, profits per partner nose-dived to $775,000. While the contingent fee contributed to the decline, the firm also faced other challenges to its bottom line in 2004. It trimmed its partnership ranks, pushed out smaller practice groups, and saw its head count drop by 4 percent. Though Howrey associates logged more billable hours on average last year, the average number of billable hours per partner slipped 17 percent. Still, Robert Ruyak, Howrey’s chairman, is painting ’04 as a good year. Though head count is down, the firm has continued to attract new partners, including some IP specialists in Europe, Ruyak says. Some of the declines in profitability stem from one-time infrastructure expenditures, such as setting up a document processing center and upgrading the firm’s computer systems, according to the firm. Of Howrey’s three key practice areas � antitrust, commercial litigation, and intellectual property � IP grew the fastest and has overtaken antitrust as the largest source of the firm’s revenues. Among the firm’s major cases last year: defending the Ford Motor Co. against a series of class actions, representing the MeadWestvaco Corp. in a price-fixing case against the packaging and office products company, and going to bat for the Schering-Plough Co. in continued class actions stemming from a Federal Trade Commission antitrust case. Howrey also persuaded the federal courts to permit Arch Coal Inc. to acquire the Triton Coal Co. over the objections of the FTC. Long-term clients such as the Anheuser-Busch Cos., the ExxonMobil Corp., Caterpillar Inc., and the H.J. Heinz Co. also provided a steady stream of business. � Emma Schwartz 14. MORGAN, LEWIS & BOCKIUS Morgan, Lewis & Bockius’ D.C.-area presence continued to shrink in 2004. The firm shed 33 lawyers and eight partners during the year, giving the firm its lowest local head count since 1997. The firm’s numbers peaked in 2002 with nearly 300 lawyers, but have dropped 14 percent since then. Contributing to the drop was the firm’s shuttering of its Northern Virginia outpost in December 2003. D.C. managing partner Steven Stone says the D.C. office did not have any layoffs in 2004. When asked whether any partners under 65 had been de-equitized, Stone says: “I don’t know the details of that. People move from fixed to equity and back based on a number of reasons, including lifestyle.” The decline came despite another year in which the firm was an active player in the lateral market. In 2004, the firm bolstered its tax and energy practices with the addition of partners Miriam Fisher from Hogan & Hartson and Thomas Poindexter and Katherine Sutton from Winston & Strawn. But the firm also lost employment partner Sheldon Kline to Thelen, Reid & Priest and IP partner D. Michael Underhill to the D.C. office of McDermott, Will & Emery. Despite having fewer bodies, the firm managed to keep revenue steady in the District, and profits per equity partner inched up 2 percent to $855,000. Stone says that, firmwide, Morgan, Lewis was able to make “market-based” raises in rates. The managing partner says that since Morgan, Lewis lawyers report to the head of their practice groups, he did not know whether lawyers in the D.C. office had hit their billable-hours targets in 2004. Among the firm’s cases last year: counseling Amtrak in a dispute with the Transport Workers Union of America, representing the Wisconsin Power & Light Co. in a dispute with the Interior Department over requirements that the utility build fishways on a dam project, and repping GlaxoSmithKline in a drug patent case before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. Its litigators also defended the Rite Aid Corp. in a number of class actions stemming from the retailer’s sale of a counterfeit heart drug. Morgan, Lewis also managed to extricate itself from the web of litigation surrounding the collapse of Brobeck, Phleger & Harrison last year. Morgan, Lewis, which had taken 150 attorneys from the failed firm, settled with Brobeck’s bankruptcy trustee for $10.2 million. � Jason McLure 15. SIDLEY AUSTIN BROWN & WOOD In some respects, 2004 was a year Sidley Austin Brown & Wood would like to forget. The firm continued to take heat for legal opinions it had issued several years ago validating tax shelter plans later deemed illegal by the Internal Revenue Service. And its simmering dispute with a group of older partners who had lost equity in the firm bubbled over in January 2005 when the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission filed suit against the firm, charging age discrimination. But business in the firm’s D.C. office boomed despite the turmoil. Gross revenue grew 17 percent to $166.4 million, and local profits per partner smashed through the $1 million mark. D.C. managing partner Carter Phillips says the office’s 30-attorney international trade group helped fuel the office’s growth. The firm is lead outside counsel to European aerospace giant Airbus S.A.S. in its ongoing trade dispute with the Boeing Corp. Sidley lawyers also represented Brazil before the World Trade Organization in the country’s litigation over U.S. cotton subsidies. As with many firms, Sidley’s Securities and Exchange Commission enforcement practice grew rapidly in 2004. “We went from one partner and one associate to three partners and 10 associates,” says Phillips. “And [the SEC practice] will continue to grow.” And while environmental lawyers have seen their practice slow in recent years, the firm enjoyed a steady stream of work from General Electric Inc., representing it in matters related to the Superfund cleanups on New York’s Hudson River and Massachusetts’ Housatonic River. Sidley lawyers have also counseled longtime client AT&T Corp. on a host of regulatory matters related to its proposed merger with SBC Communications Inc. But will the firm continue to collect legal fees from the combined giant after the merger? “That’s the $34 million question,” Phillips says. � Jason McLure 16. DICKSTEIN SHAPIRO MORIN & OSHINSKY Profits per partner at the D.C. office of Dickstein Shapiro Morin & Oshinsky fell by half in 2004 to $842,000, and the firm’s D.C.-area revenue plummeted from $249 million to $158 million, sending the firm tumbling from third to 16th on the D.C. 20. The fall, however, wasn’t unexpected. In 2002 and 2003, the firm’s revenue and profit numbers were bolstered by a huge contingent fee collected in a suit against vitamin manufacturers. That payout netted the firm roughly $150 million. But the last of the hoard was paid out to partners in the first quarter of 2003, bringing the firm’s bottom line back toward earth. “We fell from the stratosphere to merely the high atmosphere,” says Michael Nannes, the firm’s managing partner. Despite the drop, the firm has shown substantial revenue and profit growth since 2001. That year, just before the firm’s vitamin payout, Dickstein’s D.C. profits per partner were $665,000 on local revenue of $137 million. Though the firm didn’t hit any nine-figure fees last year, its corporate plaintiffs lawyers worked a number of other cases. The firm represented PepsiCo, Kraft Foods Inc., and the Procter & Gamble Co., among others, in a suit charging makers of corrugated cardboard with price fixing. Dickstein’s plaintiffs lawyers also repped Michelin North America, Continental Tire Inc., and the Cooper Tire & Rubber Co. in a price-fixing suit against a group of synthetic rubber producers. Dickstein’s insurance coverage practice counseled a number of major companies in claims against their insurers. The firm’s clients included Merck & Co., Philips USA Inc., and the gas utility KeySpan Corp. On a pro bono basis, it also represented the family members of employees at investment bank Cantor Fitzgerald killed in the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, in claims against the September 11th Victims Compensation Fund. Last fall, Dickstein entered merger negotiations with the D.C. office of Swidler Berlin. But those discussions came to an end in November after the firms were unable to resolve a conflict in their energy practice. But merger or no, the firm is placing contingent-fee bets it hopes will blast its profits back into outer space. “We’ve been investing in cases we hope will turbocharge future profits,” Nannes says. � Jason McLure 17. PATTON BOGGS “Premium pay situations” helped fatten the bottom line for Patton Boggs in 2004, says firm managing partner Stuart Pape. One of those premium situations was a fee for representing the families of those killed in the bombing of Pan Am 103 over Lockerbie, Scotland, in 1988. The Libyan government accepted responsibility for the incident in 2003, setting the stage for a $2.7 billion settlement. Read McCaffrey was the lead attorney on the case for Patton Boggs, which was one of seven court-appointed counsel for the plaintiffs in the Libyan suit. Though Pape declined to specify Patton Boggs’ exact fee, he acknowledges that the case netted the firm as much as $10 million in fees last year. “The cost [of the work] was spread out over a number of years,” Pape says. “And the checks came in last year.” Those checks helped send the firm’s D.C.-area profits per partner soaring 34 percent to $850,000 on D.C.-area revenue growth of 10 percent. Though the firm added a dozen lawyers in 2004, the number of equity partners in the metro area dropped from 86 to 84. And the number of nonequity partners grew from 39 to 46 last year. Despite the changes, Pape told Legal Times that the firm was not de-equitizing partners. “We did not have any voluntary or involuntary moves from equity to nonequity status,” Pape says. But Pape acknowledges that for younger lawyers the firm is “raising the bar” for equity partnership. The firm’s vaunted government relations practice remained vital to Patton Boggs’ balance sheet. Lobbying revenues grew 13 percent to $65.8 million, making Patton Boggs’ lobby practice the highest grossing in Washington, according to data published by Influence. Among the firm’s achievements was acting on behalf of client 1-800 CONTACTS to push Congress to enact legislation allowing contact lens wearers to use their optometrist’s prescription to purchase contacts at another retailer. The firm is continuing an effort to diversify beyond Patton Boggs’ historic lobbying practice, Pape says. That move includes growing the firm’s intellectual property group. In 2004 the group’s lawyers won a $6 million patent infringement case in Delaware for medical equipment maker Becton, Dickinson & Co. Firmwide, the ratio of the paychecks for the firm’s highest- and lowest-paid partners jumped in 2004, to 38-to-1. That ratio may prove problematic should the firm seek to merge � a possibility Pape doesn’t discount. “We’re open to anything that might make sense,” Pape says. “But we’re not driven by size.” � Jason McLure 18. CROWELL & MORING Crowell & Moring may just be this year’s D.C. 20 comeback story. The firm last made the list in 2002, powered by a quartet of big contingent-fee payouts. Three of those payouts came from cases involving U.S. hostages held by the Iranian government. This year the firm bounced back with a 15 percent spike in gross revenue. And partners say they didn’t have any contingency this time to push revenues higher. “It is not the result of contingencies or decreasing partners or moving to new offices or any one-time thing like that,” says firm Chairman John Macleod. “It comes from a growth of our core businesses.” In 2004 the firm saw its D.C. office revenue grow from $123.6 million to $142.3 million. With no change in the number of equity partners, average profits per partner grew by 25 percent to $705,000. Macleod says part of the growth can be attributed to a concerted effort in recent years to increase the number of “centerpiece clients,” those who bring in more than $1 million per year. The firm is also cross-selling different practices to those clients. The strategy appears to be working: Over the past four years, the number of those clients has climbed from 13 to 29, and the corporate group has seen more than 150 crossover clients. SBC Communications Inc. was the firm’s biggest client in 2004, bringing in billables in the range of $10 million. That relationship is continuing to pay dividends. The firm represented SBC in its AT&T Wireless Services Inc. acquisition in 2004 and is now handling antitrust components of the deal. Crowell also serves as national counsel for Caterpillar Inc. on product liability, legislation, and regulatory issues. The firm also handled litigation, antitrust, and international trade work for DuPont and did antitrust and litigation work for longtime client United Technologies Corp. All three clients brought in around $5 million each, the firm said. Macleod says the litigation group is still far and away the firm’s largest practice, but Crowell also saw growth in securities work and has expanded its antitrust practice to better accommodate crossover clients. Macleod also acknowledges that the firm has started to pay more attention to its billing and collection practices, which also helped boost the bottom line. “If you look at the gross revenue numbers for the last three years � the profits per partner and the revenue per lawyer � they are all steadily growing. There is sustained growth,” he says, and based on that growth, “you have to accept the proposition that this is not a one-time thing.” But he adds, “This year we are beating the pants off the other years.” � Bethany Broida 19. WILEY REIN & FIELDING The communications world is in upheaval these days, and that’s been good for business at Washington’s Wiley Rein & Fielding. Though the firm remained in the No. 19 spot on the D.C. rankings, Wiley Rein’s revenues continued to grow at a steady pace, hitting $140 million in 2004, a 6 percent jump. “We had the kind of improvement that we desired to have,” says firm Chairman Richard Wiley. At a time when most major D.C. firms have banked their futures on expanding outside the Beltway, Wiley Rein has made its money by capitalizing on an old Washington standby: regulatory work. Overall, head count inched up slightly to 251 attorneys, including a few more equity partners. Though the spread between the highest- and lowest-paid partners at Wiley Rein is relatively wide, the average profits per partner moved up more than 4 percent to $745,000. The firm’s trademark communications practice remained vibrant. Wiley Rein served as regulatory counsel to Vivendi Universal SA in connection with the merger between NBC and Vivendi Universal Entertainment. Media companies such as Belo Corp. and Gannett Co. tapped the firm to push the Federal Communications Commission to loosen media ownership regulations. And Wiley Rein served as counsel to the Blackstone Group, a private equity investment firm, in its acquisition of New Skies Satellites. Insurance, the second-largest practice at the firm, continued to grow. Longtime client the Zurich American Insurance Co. provided steady business. Intellectual property work was up last year as well, particularly through the firm’s representation of Mylan Laboratories. And a team of seven attorneys in government contracts and intellectual property played a role in defending the Boeing Co. in a suit brought by the Lockheed Martin Corp. that included allegations that Boeing stole trade secrets. Wiley Rein’s lawyers also handled the bankruptcy proceedings of Dornier Aviation of North America. The presidential-election year proved fruitful for the firm’s election law group, led by Jan Baran, which expanded its list of clients to more than 175. Although the firm remained at the bottom of the D.C. 20, it is poised for a strong year ahead, Wiley says, with its work for Verizon Communications Inc. in the acquisition of MCI Inc. and its representation of NTP Inc. in a major patent infringement suit against the maker of BlackBerry wireless devices. � Emma Schwartz 20. JONES DAY Jones Day clung to its place among the 20 highest-grossing D.C.-area firms � but just barely. The firm’s Washington office brought in $139.1 million in 2004, edging out DLA Piper Rudnick Gray Cary, which brought in $136.2 million, and last year’s No. 20, Venable, which grossed $135.1 million. For Jones Day, which has 241 lawyers in the D.C. metro area, litigation and antitrust remained the mainstays of the firm’s activity last year, combining to make up 85 percent of the office’s work, according to Mary Ellen Powers, the firm’s D.C. managing partner. The firm defended the Chevron Corp. and the Texaco Petroleum Co. in arbitration and litigation on expenses from environmental claims over the companies’ oil exploration and production in the Ecuadorian rain forest. Jones Day lawyers went to bat for the the IBM Corp. in California and New York courts against workers’ claims of chemical exposures in the workplace. The firm has also been representing longtime client the R.J. Reynolds Co. in federal court in the District in the Justice Department’s civil case against the tobacco industry. Though the firm’s intellectual property practice is still small inside the Beltway, it more than doubled during 2004, according to Powers. The gains came in no small part from Jones Day’s acquisition of about 100 former Pennie & Edmonds attorneys, including a few associates who joined in the District. The group handled key patent infringement actions for clients Hand Held Products Inc., Lucent Technologies Inc., and the Eastman Kodak Co., among others. Overall, D.C.-area head count edged up 4 percent in 2004. Antitrust work also increased slightly, according to Powers. The firm has been counsel to Nextel Communications in its $35 billion merger with the Sprint Corp. and an adviser to Federated Department Stores Inc. in its $17 billion acquisition of the May Department Stores Co. Also last year, Jones Day advised Albertson’s on its $2.5 billion acquisition of Shaw’s Supermarkets Inc. from British food retailer J Sainsbury. Jones Day’s smaller tax, structured finance, and energy regulatory practice also had strong years, according to Powers. � Emma Schwartz

This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.

To view this content, please continue to their sites.

Not a Lexis Advance® Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Why am I seeing this?

LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.

For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]


ALM Legal Publication Newsletters

Sign Up Today and Never Miss Another Story.

As part of your digital membership, you can sign up for an unlimited number of a wide range of complimentary newsletters. Visit your My Account page to make your selections. Get the timely legal news and critical analysis you cannot afford to miss. Tailored just for you. In your inbox. Every day.

Copyright © 2021 ALM Media Properties, LLC. All Rights Reserved.